Adiema & another v Shisikani (Environment & Land Case E013 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 1311 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The Environment and Land Court cancelled three land titles and struck out a suit because the owners tried to relitigate a dispute the Court of Appeal had already decided.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether the Plaintiffs' suit claiming permanent injunction and demolition was res judicata
The suit was res judicata because the Defendant's occupation and proprietorship of 2 acres of the mother parcel was approved by the Court of Appeal, and the suit sought to relitigate that title
The parties litigated over parcel South Kabras/Shamberere/2650 in Kakamega HCCC No. 50 of 2008 and Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2014, where the Defendant's adverse possession of 2 acres was confirmed. The new parcels were subdivisions of the same parcel, created by the First Plaintiff in breach of the Court of Appeal decree. Seeking an injunction and demolition against the Defendant's occupation was an attempt to relitigate a matter already determined.
Whether the Defendant's counterclaim for cancellation of the titles was res judicata
The counterclaim was not res judicata since the issue of cancellation of the titles had never been heard and determined in the previous cases
The previous High Court and Court of Appeal proceedings concerned the Defendant's entitlement to 2 acres by adverse possession. The suit properties were subdivisions created after those judgments. The issue of cancellation of the titles in respect of those subdivisions had never been in issue or determined on the merits, so the counterclaim was properly before the court.
Whether the titles to the suit properties should be cancelled
The titles were cancelled because they were issued illegally, un-procedurally and through misrepresentation, contrary to the Court of Appeal judgment
The Court of Appeal order directed the Deputy Registrar to sign on behalf of the First Plaintiff, not the Defendant. Yet the First Plaintiff had the Deputy Registrar sign on the Defendant's behalf, without giving him an opportunity to participate. Registration of parcel 3856 occurred before the Court of Appeal judgment, and parcel 3882 was created from parcel 3854, not the mother parcel. The Defendant was presented with a fait accompli. The titles were therefore impeachable under section 26 of the Land Registration Act.
Legal principles established
#- A court decree must be implemented in favour of the successful party in the manner ordered; the Deputy Registrar's power to execute documents is meant to benefit the decree holder, not to defeat his participation
- A title acquired illegally, un-procedurally or through misrepresentation is liable to be cancelled notwithstanding registration
- Res judicata bars relitigation of matters determined by a competent court even where new parcel numbers are introduced
Court orders
#- 1.The Plaintiffs' suit is struck out for being res judicata
- 2.The titles in respect of South Kabras/Shamberere/3856, South Kabras/Shamberere/3855 and South Kabras/Shamberere/3882 are hereby cancelled
- 3.Parties to strictly comply with the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal on 9th December 2014 in Kisumu Civil Appeal No. 3 of 2014
- 4.If there is no compliance by the First Plaintiff within 90 (ninety) days from the date of delivery of this judgment, the Deputy Registrar will be at liberty to sign all necessary documents on behalf of the First Plaintiff, to ensure that the judgment of the Court of Appeal is complied with
- 5.The Defendant shall have costs of this case
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil suit under the Land Registration Act and Civil Procedure Act (specific enabling provision not stated in the judgment)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Adiema & another v Shisikani (Environment & Land Case E013 of 2021) [2025] KEELC 1311 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment (Plaint dated 1st November 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/1311/eng@2025-03-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.